Chuck Grassely Criminally Refers Leftwing Activist Who Claimed in Graphic Detail to Have Been Raped by Brett Kavanaugh, But Who Turned Out to Be Decades Older Than Him and Never Having Been in the Same State as Him; She Admits It Was all a "Ploy" a

Women never lie about rape, except for the many, many documented cases of women lying about rape.

So when people say "What would an accuser's incentive to lie be?" -- well, sometimes it's a simple as getting attention.

Or, as this woman now admits: to derail the confirmation of a justice she opposed for partisan political reasons.

This demands jail time. You cannot just defame people and lodge false accusations to Congress because your Pussy-Hat told you it was okay to lie.

Letter below; Twitchy has good excerpts at the link.

Is the media going to cover this at all? Or will they suppress real news in the interests of the Democrat Party yet again?

Would the Media-Democrat Complex care to revisit and correct its previous claims that women never lie about rape, and that they never have any incentive to do so?

Dear Attorney General Sessions and Director Wray:

I am once again writing regarding fabricated allegations the United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary recently received. As you know, the Senate Judiciary Committee processed the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to serve as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States, leading to his eventual confirmation on October 6, 2018. As part of that process, the Committee has investigated various allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh. The Committee's investigation has involved communicating with numerous individuals claiming to have relevant information. While many of those individuals have provided the Committee information in good faith, it unfortunately appears some have not. As explained below, I am writing to refer Ms. Judy Munro-Leighton for investigation of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (materially false statements) and 1505 (obstruction), for materially false statements she made to the Committee during the course of the Committee’s investigation.

On September 25, 2018, staffers for Senator Harris, a Committee member, referred an undated handwritten letter to Committee investigators that her California office had received signed under the alias "Jane Doe" from Oceanside, California.1

The letter contained highly graphic sexual-assault accusations against Judge Kavanaugh. The anonymous accuser alleged that Justice Kavanaugh and a friend had raped her "several times each" in the backseat of a car. In addition to being from an anonymous accuser, the letter listed no return address, failed to provide any timeframe, and failed to provide any location -- beyond an automobile -- in which these alleged incidents took place.

Regardless, Committee staff quickly began investigating the claims as part of the broader investigation, hindered by the limited information provided. On September 26, 2018, Committee staff questioned Judge Kavanaugh about these allegations in a transcribed interview conducted under penalty of felony.2

Later that day, September 26th, the Committee publicly released the transcript of that interview with Judge Kavanaugh, which included the full text of the Jane Doe letter.5

Then, on October 3, 2018, Committee staff received an email from a Ms. Judy Munro-Leighton with a subject line claiming: "I am Jane Doe from Oceanside CA -- Kavanaugh raped
me."6

Ms. Munro-Leighton wrote that she was "sharing with you the story of the night that Brett Kavanaugh and his friend sexually assaulted and raped me in his car" and referred to "the letter that I sent to Sen. Kamala Harris on Sept. 19 with details of this vicious assault." She continued: "I know that [']Jane Doe['] will get no media attention, but I am deathly afraid of revealing any information about myself or my family." She then included a typed version of the Jane Doe letter.

Committee investigators began investigating Ms. Munro-Leighton’s allegations. Given her relatively unique name, Committee investigators were able to use open-source research to locate Ms. Munro-Leighton and determine that she: (1) is a left-wing activist; (2) is decades older than Judge Kavanaugh; and (3) lives in neither the Washington DC area nor California, but in Kentucky.

In order to investigate her sexual-assault claims, Committee investigators first attempted to reach her by phone on October 3, 2018, but were unsuccessful. On October 29, Committee investigators again attempted contact, leaving a voicemail. In response, Ms. Munro-Leighton left Committee investigators a voicemail on November 1, 2018.

Eventually, on November 1, 2018, Committee investigators connected with Ms. Munro-Leighton by phone and spoke with her about the sexual-assault allegations against Judge Kavanaugh she had made to the Committee. Under questioning by Committee investigators, Ms. Munro-Leighton admitted, contrary to her prior claims, that she had not been sexually assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh and was not the author of the original "Jane Doe "letter.

When directly asked by Committee investigators if she was, as she had claimed, the "Jane Doe" from Oceanside California who had sent the letter to Senator Harris, she admitted: "No, no, no. I did that as a way to grab attention. I am not Jane Doe . . . but I did read Jane Doe's letter. I read the transcript of the call to your Committee. . . . I saw it online. It was news."

She further confessed to Committee investigators that (1) she "just wanted to get attention"; (2) "it was a tactic"; and (3) "that was just a ploy" She told Committee investigators that she had called Congress multiple times during the Kavanaugh hearing process -- including prior to the time Dr. Ford's allegations surfaced -- to oppose his nomination. Regarding the false sexual-assault allegation she made via her email to the Committee, she said: "I was angry, and I sent it out."

In short, during the Committee's time-sensitive investigation of allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, Ms. Munro-Leighton submitted a fabricated allegation, which diverted Committee resources. When questioned by Committee investigators she admitted it was false, a "ploy," and a "tactic." She was opposed to Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation.

As I have repeatedly stated, Committee investigations in support of the judicial nomination process are an essential part of the Committee's constitutional role. The Committee is grateful to citizens who come forward with relevant information in good faith, even if they are not one hundred percent sure about what they know. But when individuals intentionally mislead the Committee, they divert Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations and materially impede our work. Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal. It is illegal to make materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to Congressional investigators. It is illegal to obstruct Committee investigations.

Accordingly, in light of the seriousness of these facts, and the threat these types of actions pose to the Committee's ability to perform its constitutional duties, I hope you will give this referral the utmost consideration.

...

Unbelievable.

And you'll never hear another peep about this, at least not from the Democrat-Media Complex.